Trump and his Georgia co-defendants sought to have the RICO charges dismissed on First Amendment grounds, but Judge Scott McAfee rejected their requests.
Judge McAfee ruled:
Furthermore, the statutes do not overtly violate defendants’ freedom of association. Our Supreme Court upheld legislation affecting the right of association after “[b]balance the government’s interests in protecting the integrity of the democratic process and ensuring fair elections against the fundamental rights of the individual[.]” Fortson v. Weeks, 232 Ga. 472, 479-82 10 Documents “shall include, but not be limited to, liens, encumbrances, property documents,
instruments relating to a security interest or title to real or personal property, or other documents, statements or representations of facts, laws, rights or opinions.†OCGA § 16-10-20.1(a). 23SC188947 (1974) (laws regulating disclosure of campaign contributions do not violate free speech or the “fundamental political rights of the people”); see also United States v. Harriss, 347 U.S. 612, 626 (1954) (while the Lobbying Act in question may have a deterrent effect on the exercise of First Amendment rights, “[t]The risk of such restriction is too remote to require the repeal of a law which on its face clearly falls within the area of Congressional power and is designed to safeguard a vital national interest”).
Compared to legislation regarding campaign contribution disclosure and lobbying activities, the statutes in question only incidentally – if at all – affect defendants’ association rights. Therefore, even if the State retains its interest in preserving the integrity of the presidential electoral process, the risk that this outweighs any implications
the right of association is legally irrelevant.
For more stories like this, sign up for our The Daily newsletter.
Without foreclosing the possibility of raising similar challenges as applied at the appropriate time after the creation of a factual record, defendants’ motions based on First Amendment grounds are denied.
Judge McAfee ruled that Defendant Trump and his other RICO co-defendants suffer no violations of their First Amendment rights by being accused of engaging in a conspiracy to overturn the 2020 presidential election.
The First Amendment claim rests largely on Trump’s belief that, as a presidential candidate and former president, he is above the law and has the ability to do and say whatever he wants. The judge rejected the idea that people suspected of committing crimes have their freedom of association hindered by being accused of such crimes.
The Trump Georgia defendants are throwing everything against the wall and hoping that something will stick, but so far they have had no results.
A special message from PoliticusUSA
If you are in a position to donate exclusively to help us keep the doors open on PoliticusUSA during what is a critical election year, please do so here.
We are honored to be able to put your interests first for 14 years as we respond only to our readers and will not compromise on that core, core value of PoliticusUSA.
Jason is the managing editor. He is also a member of the White House press pool and a congressional correspondent for PoliticusUSA. Jason has a bachelor’s degree in political science. His graduate work focused on public policy, with a specialization in social reform movements.
Professional rewards and subscriptions
Member of the Society of Professional Journalists and the American Political Science Association